A Typology of Women's Use of Violence in Intimate Relationships

Abstract

Reports have appeared in the popular press in recent years concluding that women are just as violent as men. These reports stem from acontextual survey studies comparing prevalence rates of women's and men's physical violence. The authors contend that the above conclusion is simplistic and misleading, and that a theoretical framework that embeds women's violence in the context in which it occurs is sorely needed. This article proposes a model that includes women's violence in the context of their victimization by male partners, motivations for violent behavior and how they cope with relationship problems, experiences of childhood trauma, and outcomes of depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder, and substance use. The model is then examined within the context of gender, race, and class. The cultural context of domestic violence for African American and Latina women is reviewed. This literature reinforces the need to place women's violence in a broader sociocultural context. Keywords: intimate partner violence; women's use of violence in intimate relationships

A literature review of intimate partner violence and its classifications

“…For instance, men are more likely to use sexual coercion and coercive control against their partners, whereas, it is important to understand the role of victimization in understanding the women's motivation to use violence (Swan et al, 2008). In addition, women's violence is generally less frightening to men than vice versa (Swan & Snow, 2002. In the following, typologies that have been proposed to explain women's use of violence are discussed.…”

“…However, it is also established that women are much more likely to be injured and injured severely than men (Archer, 2000;Swan & Snow, 2002. Researchers have attempted to explore, contextualize, and examine the motivations for, and impact of, IPV, especially in response to the higher arrest rate of women in the U.S. as a result of changes in the mandatory arrest laws (Babcock, Miller, & Siard, 2003;Bair-Merritt et al, 2010;Hines & Douglas, 2010;Miller & Meloy, 2006;Swan & Snow, 2002 have argued that men and women have similar motivations such as anger and a desire to resolve disagreements (Straus, 2005), or a desire to exert power and control (Rosen, Stith, Few, Daly, & Tritt, 2005;Seamans, Rubin, & Stabb, 2007). However, feminist researchers believe that women use violence as a mean of self-defense, and in response to the abuse, protection of children and retaliation (Dasgupta, 2002;Dobash & Dobash, 2004;Swan & Snow, 2006).…”

“…However, women committed equal or greater moderate violence and/or emotional abuse against their male counterparts. For these women, self-defense was the main reason for the use of IPV (Swan & Snow, 2002.…”

“…Thirty four percent of the sample (n = 108) belonged to this category (Swan & Snow, 2002). This category was subdivided into two types.…”

“…During the past two decades, numerous typologies of IPV have been suggested: some are based on the characteristics of the violence (Abbott, Johnson, Koziol-McLain, & Lowenstein, 1995;Johnson & Ferraro, 2000;Johnston & Campbell, 1993), while others are based on individual characteristics of the perpetrator (Gottman et al, 1995;Hamberger, Lohr, Bonge, & Tolin, 1996;Holtzworth-Munroe & Stuart, 1994;Miller & Meloy, 2006;Swan, Gambone, Caldwell, Sullivan, & Snow, 2008;Swan & Snow, 2002.…”